JohnRawls wrote:I am not interested if the UK leaves or not. I am interested if EU problems are sorted out. To a lesser degree i am interested if the UKs problems are sorted out. There is no point of the UK in EU right now because it will block any reform as it used too.(Both good and bad reform)

If you are not interested then why does "No Deal" matter to you? Let the UK deal with their own problems. The house of fools will continue to argue until they see what they have lost by not having it, so why be surprised they argue now? Although I doubt the UK will leave unless they back May's deal actually.

B0ycey wrote:If you are not interested then why does "No Deal" matter to you? Let the UK deal with their own problems. The house of fools will continue to argue until they see what they have lost by not having it, so why be surprised they argue now? Although I doubt the UK will leave unless they back May's deal actually.

Any deal or no deal or no Brexit matters to us because it causes its own problems and prevents some problems from reappearing. So anything that the UK chooses literally matters for the EU.

I do not think that any nation is hopeless to change; however, I think that some nations do require a lot more effort than others to become changed. - Verv

JohnRawls wrote:Any deal or no deal or no Brexit matters to us because it causes its own problems and prevents some problems from reappearing. So anything that the UK chooses literally matters for the EU.

And what problems are that? Trade won't stop. It will just slow down. Anything that is vital that is not a precursor for the single market will get sorted out even under Hard Brexit. If your only objective is to stop the UK from interfering in EU affairs then it won't matter what parliament does next week.

B0ycey wrote:And what problems are that? Trade won't stop. It will just slow down. Anything that is vital that is not a precursor for the single market will get sorted out even under Hard Brexit. If your only objective is to stop the UK from interfering in EU affairs then it won't matter what parliament does next week.

Not exactly. We need to know also what kind of relationship we will have with the UK after Brexit. So we know what UK will contribute and what it will not contribute. In case of a deal or no deal we need to know how far UK is planning to diverge because in case of large divergence we need to take action from our side, be it tariffs or simply stack the odds against UK economy in other ways. We need to know what you want to cooperate in be it security, military etc.

Basically we need to minimize the damage that can be done to the EU/Members without compromising our competitivnes. If UK is planning to cheat in some way then we need to simply make it unable to compete at all economically be it by tariffs or our privileged economical position.

I think this is something the people in the UK misunderstand. EU is not inherently good or bad. It is what it is right now, mostly a loose political and social construct with heavy economic base. We are only fair to member states or to states that don't really wanna join but want the single market. UK doesn't want neither of those options. So UK will inevitably get the ugly part of EUs economic stick.

You will say that is harsh but that is the reality.(For any country. Even the core of Brexit is this. UK wants to do it better than the EU) Isn't that the whole point of the EU on the economic side, to pool up our economic might and resources to get better deals or to pressure others who might want to fuck with us economically from one side and to give economic benefits to the ones inside the EU itself from the other side.

I do not think that any nation is hopeless to change; however, I think that some nations do require a lot more effort than others to become changed. - Verv

B0ycey wrote:If the UK is a third party, the EU will trade with them by WTO. It is not about be harsh, vindictive, competitive or whatever but the way it will be. That is, if the UK leave. Which I doubt.

As I say, if your main objective is to keep the UK out of EU affairs, next week is not important.

No, it is not. Keeping UK out of EU affairs is not preferable to UK being constructive and taking part in EU affairs. Problem is, with the things as they stand now UKs exit is more preferable compared to UK membership.(UK is not constructive nor has interest in EU affairs/change) Your situation is shaky. UK can't take part or allow any reform because UK establishment and media are giving a perception of EU dictate and blaming us for every mistake UK does.(We are not saints but we are not responsible for UK mistakes.) This is not exactly an exclusive phenomenon to the UK but it is aggravated by Margaret Thatcher supply side economics, Blaires/Browns decisions regarding immigration, recession of 2008 and austerity.

So your politicians have historically balanced the line between increasing support for leave but blaming the EU for your own mistakes and taking part in EU reform and problem solving within the EU which was viewed as problematic for local politics.

I do not think that any nation is hopeless to change; however, I think that some nations do require a lot more effort than others to become changed. - Verv

But none of this has any real relivance to next week. The deal will get voted down and so the saga continues. Whether the UK remains an EU member or not to interfere with EU affairs will be depend on factors closer to the end of March.

B0ycey wrote:But none of this has any real relivance to next week. The deal will get voted down and so the saga continues. Whether the UK remains a EU member or not to interfere with EU affairs will be depend on factors closer to the end of March.

Stress not.

Almost certainly it will be voted down.

I do not think that any nation is hopeless to change; however, I think that some nations do require a lot more effort than others to become changed. - Verv

You wot m8? Perhaps Tony Blairs "Labour", but by no means is it supportive of a Corbyn Labour. That's a laughable thing to write. They were barely supportive of Ed Millibands Labour, even at the height of the ConDem coalition and he's the quintessential centrist politician.

The U.K WILL 'LEAVE' the E.U on 29 March 2019, whether there is, or is not, a 'BREXIT' Deal vote in favour.

Under Lisbon Treaty rules, there is a just 2 years between a country declaring Article 50 withdrawl of assent-to the date for when that country is no longer a member.Now, the E.U has indicated that it would allow, without prejudice, the U.K to rescind it's decision, BUT, that cannot happen, because the government can only introduce a 'Repeal' of the Withdrawl Act, by having a mandate to do so.As the original mandate has not been completed, it also has no mandate to reverse that Act & parliament cannot do that.

The reason it cannot do it, is because the government has no legitimate constitutional right to do so without a mandate from the people & there will be no 2nd referendum to effect that wish.

The 'alternative'(which would NOT stop our Leaving on 29 March 2019), would be a general election following a 'no confidence' vote in parliament, BUT, there is a 'reckoning' to pay for the MP's that have attempted to frustrate the will of the people & the Labour Party have not got the guts to include a new referendum in their manifesto.Gordon BROWN promised a referendum in 2007, for which he then denied the public their say as promised in the Labour Party manifesto, as the other main parties did.

Our trust, if ever there was any, in our politicians, is at an all time nadir, unlikely ever to improve.

Andre PREVIN : "Your playing all the 'wrong' notes" .

Eric MORECOMBE ; "I'm playing all the 'right' notes,but, not necessarily in the 'right' order".

An increasingly boxed-in prime minister must now set out her plan B within three working days of a defeat next Tuesday, after the rebel amendment passed.

There were furious scenes in the House of Commons as the Speaker, John Bercow, took the controversial decision to allow a vote on the amendment, tabled by the former attorney general Dominic Grieve.

A string of MPs, including the leader of the house, Andrea Leadsom, repeatedly intervened to question the Speaker’s approach. Some accused him of being biased against Brexit.

But parliament went on to back Grieve as the prime minister was defied by Conservative rebels determined to hand control of the Brexit process to MPs if next week’s vote is lost.

The fresh defeat, which followed a separate backbench amendment to the finance bill on Tuesday, means the government will have to return to parliament swiftly with a plan.

An accelerated timetable will also pile the pressure on Labour to move quickly. The motion setting out the government’s plan can be amended by MPs hoping to push their own alternative proposals, from a second referendum to a harder Brexit. Jeremy Corbyn’s party will have to decide which to back.

Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, on Wednesday became the most senior Labour figure to suggest that the article 50 process might have to be extended, if the deadlock in parliament could not be broken.

He told MPs: “There is a question of the extension of article 50, which may well be inevitable now, given the position that we are in, but of course we can only seek it, because the other 27 [EU members] have to agree.”

Starmer also said: “We are going to have to look at what available options are realistically still on the table and what now are the merits of each of them.”

Corbyn will use a speech in Wakefield on Thursday to step up his demands for a general election, and frame Labour’s approach to next week’s key vote and the steps the party will take afterwards.

“A government that cannot get its business through the House of Commons is no government at all. So I say to Theresa May: if you are so confident in your deal, call that election, and let the people decide,” he will say.

“To break the deadlock, an election is not only the most practical option, it is also the most democratic option.”

He will insist the best way to overcome the divisions that drove the Brexit vote is to elect a Labour government.

Government sources on Wednesday night confirmed reports that they are considering making another concession, on workers’ rights, in a bid to win over Labour MPs.

May could accept an amendment backed by MPs including Labour’s John Mann, that would offer stronger protections for workers’ rights after Brexit. Mann was among a group of Labour MPs who met the prime minister on Wednesday to discuss what changes she could make to win their support for her deal, with other attendees including Stoke Central MP Gareth Snell.

Meanwhile, May will seek to underline international support for her stance, as she welcomes the Japanese prime minister, Shinzō Abe, to Britain. The pair will announce a series of trade and cultural collaborations, and hail the end of an export ban on British meat products to Japan.

The government announced details of new concessions on the Brexit deal on Wednesday, in an attempt to win over sceptics.

The Brexit secretary, Steve Barclay, announced that the government would accept a proposal from the Tory MP Hugo Swire that will allow MPs to vote, before the Irish backstop is implemented, if a trade deal has not been reached by mid-2020.

May’s spokesman said the plan would give MPs the options of implementing the backstop, extending the transition period, or “alternative ways you could look at, including technology”.

But the idea that it would strengthen MPs’ powers to prevent the backstop coming into force was swiftly dismissed in Brussels.

An EU diplomat said: “This is a purely internal arrangement in the UK. What counts is the treaty and the legally binding commitments in the treaty and why would the UK not want to honour its international obligations?”

Asked if the EU would have to concur with whatever decision was reached, the spokesman said it would not. “My understanding on that is that it’s a decision for the UK parliament as to which route we choose to go down.”

However, one senior Brexiter agreed with the view in Brussels that the withdrawal treaty, once ratified, would trump any vote in Westminster. “That’s the point of international treaties!” he said.

More details were also announced of the so-called “Stormont lock”, giving the Northern Ireland assembly a “strong role” in regulatory arrangements if the backstop comes into force.

But with the assembly currently suspended, a paper published by the government setting out the plans was quickly rubbished by the Democratic Unionist party.

Winning over the DUP was at the heart of No 10’s strategy for smoothing the path to May’s deal being passed by parliament. But there has been little sign since the new year that its resolve to reject the deal has weakened.

Nigel Dodds, the DUP’s leader at Westminster, described the latest proposals as “cosmetic and meaningless”.

Earlier, Bercow had clashed repeatedly with MPs over his decision to fly in the face of parliamentary convention and allow the Grieve motion to be voted on.

“The chair is simply seeking to discharge the responsibility of the holder of the office to the best of his ability,” he insisted, speaking about himself in the third person.

“That is what I have always done, and no matter what people say or how forcefully they say it, or how many times they say it or by what manner of coordination it is said, I will continue to do what I believe to be right.”

But the veteran Brexiter Peter Bone was one of those Tories expressing concern. He said the decision plunged parliament into “pretty choppy and dangerous waters at the time in our nation’s affairs when, frankly, we can least afford it”.

Another MP challenged the Speaker about a sticker on his car that “makes derogatory comments about Brexit”. Bercow shot back that the car belonged to his wife.

Rebel backbenchers believe the decision to allow the vote strengthens their hand in what they expect to be a series of battles in the days ahead, as they seek to prevent the government leading Britain out of the EU without a deal.

Downing Street sought to play down the significance of the amendment. A spokesman said: “Our intention has always been to respond quickly and provide certainty on the way forward in the event that we lose the meaningful vote.”

As I have posted before about the Labour Party, it's sickeningly, nauseating dishonesty of it & it's MP's to call for a 'people's vote' on Brexit.

For their Party under Gordon BROWN, with the connivance of the E.U, created the State of the E.U, by giving it a legal status by the instituting of a Constitution & covering that fact with a dishonest fig-leaf of textual ambiguity in making the Lisbon Treaty out to being a mere 'ammendment' of a 'Treaty'.

He denied that there were changes because he said it was unchanged, yet, hitherto, the E.U Presidency was operated on a revolving basis where each country had it's turn, in which to introduce the changes it wanted to make with E.U policies, but which, since Lisbon, the E.U as a entity of State, with a Constitution, has it's OWN President.In the face of that fundamental change in relationship with the E.U, with many others, where the U.K alone lost over 60 Vetoing powers, Gordon BROWN was in complete denial.Now, Gordon BROWN for Labour, along with the main parties at the 2007 election, promised a referendum on any Treaty changes between the U.K & the E.U.

On election, he then denied the British people a choice by NOT allowing them to have that referendum.

Gordon BROWN, the Labour Party et al, are no more 'democratic' than any tin-pot dictatorship anywhere in the world, because, once elected, they proceed to abuse the power entrusted on them by ignoring the electorate that put them in power.

The current clamour from all quarters,for a 'people's vote' are the voices of 'populism', the very notion which these very same people profess to abhor in our politics & they are anti-democratic hypocrites for denying a real democratic say to previously promised referendum on the E.U.

That deceit by Gordon BROWN, along with that of Theresa MAY, who says her 'deal' is what the people voted for(the BIG LIE), are why trust has disappeared from our political system & I don't even want to mention things like broken pledges by the current bunch in office.

Andre PREVIN : "Your playing all the 'wrong' notes" .

Eric MORECOMBE ; "I'm playing all the 'right' notes,but, not necessarily in the 'right' order".

JohnRawls has this tendency to have no clue and when you point it out he continues to display....how he has no clue.

Wow, a blind ideologue calling me clueless...

Your a person who believes that labour is being harassed by the media while ignoring the fact that labour also has its own propaganda outlets.You do not get to the place where labour or tory parties are without having that kind of influence.

Regarding The Guardian. It is a pro-labour resource. It might be not as blatant as Fox News or Breitbart but it doesn't change the situation one bit.

I do not think that any nation is hopeless to change; however, I think that some nations do require a lot more effort than others to become changed. - Verv

User mini profile

noemon wrote:The Guardian is not a pro-Labour resource. You are wrong. The Guardian openly endorses the Lib-Dem party officially, reports only Tory politics and proactively trashes Labour.

Labour is supposed to have the New Statesman, openly endorsing it.

Well, it does employ the likes of Owen JONES as a columnist,whom, incidentally, also writes up in the New Statesman & in the realms of the political spectrum is as far to the LEFT as is possible without completing the circle by eclipsing the Tories on the Right.

Now, you may argue that The Guardian, by employing him for his literary incontinence, isn't an indication of it's favouring the Labour Party, BUT, on the other hand, you would not expect to see George OSBORNE writing columns in the same newspaper as Owen JONES would you?

Blame is at home not over the channel. We executed our steps on lies and falsehood. The EU didn't push and as such we alone must take accountability.

Plus Corbyn is gearing up for a general election and has weakened his Brexit Rhetoric. Obviously he knows the Remainers can't be silenced. Can't wait for manifesto time. And should his confidence vote fail, it is clear Labour default position is EUREF2. Let the commons vote commence.